[nerdjon]

I am still quite shocked that anyone looked at the side by side images within Nvidia and actually thought this was good and no one would have an issue with this.

Now I will admit that if you don't compare them, the final image looks ok. Like if I did not know what was happening I likely wouldn't give it a second thought. It looks off but so many video games already look off that I don't think I would have really thought anything other than "well it's a video game".

But when compared to the original image it is so obvious that the artistry and the original intent is just completely lost.

They claim that the developers and artists have more control over this, well maybe if that is actually true (because we all know guardrails on AI have been perfect so far...) they should have been involved in using that control for the video showing this off. Otherwise I honestly hope this never ships.

But even if it does, the power requirements for this make it kinda DOA anyways.

[wtallis]

As demoed, it's obviously very bad. But before giving up on it completely, I'd like to see a version that can remain faithful to the original color grading and tone mapping. Those changes affecting the overall look of the whole frame really distract from comparing the more subtle lighting differences where they might be onto something good.

But I'm also skeptical about whether they can pull this off in a way that doesn't exacerbate the already-severe issues DLSS has with latency and temporal stability. Enhancements that make for great screenshots often don't translate to great realtime gameplay.

[hbn]

An issue I haven’t seen anyone bring up: how are they going to keep the randomly generated sexy new AI face for the characters consistent between shots?

A frame of the character shown 20 hours into the game doesn’t remember the random generated sexy face it gave that character 1 hour into the game.

Everything about this is so stupid.

[expedition32]

It is really tragic because DLSS has been pretty great so far.

[AuthAuth]

100ms latency to blur the game isnt what i'd consider great

[archagon]

In my experience I get 2x perf without visual degradation or any notable latency at all. Certainly not 100ms — I can easily notice 16ms.

[AuthAuth]

The latency is very noticeable I dont know how you can claim to notice 16ms but not notice that you are getting 80-100ms latency.

[archagon]

Well, because I'm not getting 80-100ms latency. In a first-person shooter, 100ms would be 6 frames and make the game basically unplayable with a mouse. Also there's nothing intrinsically expensive about DLSS to cause such a latency. I suspect something is wrong with your setup?

[AuthAuth]

If you dont believe me you can look up latency tests for it. without DLSS rendering is ~15ms. With preformance mode DLSS that raises to about 30-35MS. Balanced is about 60ms and beautiful is 90-100ms input latency.

[lm28469]

Gaming isn't even a side project for them anymore, last time I checked it was under 3% of their revenues, I wouldn't be surprised if it's under 1% now, I don't think they care much if at all about this domain anymore

[lofaszvanitt]

more like 10-12%

[BlackLotus89]

7.48% https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/nvda/metrics/revenue-by-seg...